unfortunately the least "lucky" among us suffer the most and by those belittling the fact that they do, SCREAMS, volumes about certain people, including posters to TTF.

It is pretty amusing to see those seem so delicate and will weep and wail and whine bitterly upon the slightest provocation regarding certain issues turn around and attempt tough talk regarding others (obviously depending upon an entirely self-serving basis). It's kinda like if Tammy Faye Bakker were to chastise others, saying they need to toughen up and stop crying so easily. There's a touch of a credibility issue there, which they're clearly completely oblivious about (upon the same basis, it would seem).

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

unfortunately the least "lucky" among us suffer the most and by those belittling the fact that they do, SCREAMS, volumes about certain people, including posters to TTF.

Least lucky? You might be right because e most stupid also suffer but are too stupid to realize it. Or maybe the most stupid suffer more than the most unlucky, at least in their own minds, when they can't get the latest iPhone or Nikes. I belittle lazy people not those who are truly suffering due to their health and circumstances. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself, but I do now realize that some here either can't read, choose not to read nor comprehend, or can't remember what happened yesterday.Screams volumes about some posters on the TTF.Especially the troll^^^

Logged

Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other. Ronald Reagan

Since it's an AP poll, why not just read it on AP? I distrust Newsmax because they're taking poll numbers that show Obama's tax increases are wildly popular (way over two-to-one), then headlining in a way that implies the opposite.

Most people I've read who make sense on this issue favor both shrinking government and raising taxes, so implying that they're competing ideas doesn't add much to the debate. Soaking the rich is an easier sell politically, but I think all the Bush tax cuts should be at least partly rescinded, across the board.

Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain

No problem with that what so ever, as long as it's just a first step. We need more gradations at the top, and for income to be income, period. It is asisnine that someone making $400K pays the same rate as some one making $40 M, and that that person is paying the same as someone making $400 M. and same for $4 B. We also need to remove the cap on SS taxes. If you did that you could make the tax holiday permanent, and maybe reduce it by another % or 2 and SS would be solvent forever.

No problem with that what so ever, as long as it's just a first step. We need more gradations at the top, and for income to be income, period. It is asisnine that someone making $400K pays the same rate as some one making $40 M, and that that person is paying the same as someone making $400 M. and same for $4 B. We also need to remove the cap on SS taxes. If you did that you could make the tax holiday permanent, and maybe reduce it by another % or 2 and SS would be solvent forever.

This is pure jealousy or class warfare as PM likes to say. If you were making 4 mil or 400 mil or 4 bil would you be paying 39%? You have that option. I doubt you would. I could be wrong though.

Logged

Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other. Ronald Reagan

I would be paying whatever the laws written by the elected representatives of the country I have chosen to live in say I would. And would feel privileged to have the opportunity to participate and contribute. I realize it's not about "me", it is about " the general welfare" of the society, not the "greater weathfare" of individuals. That "promoting the general welfare" requires a large percentage of the GDP be reinvested in the society rather than being siphoned off by a small group of individuals. That one purpose of the tax code is to protect the "general welfare" from the predatory practices of some individuals. No jealousy, just no ego-centric "I got mine, you're on your own" attitude.

DThis is pure jealousy or class warfare as PM likes to say. If you were making 4 mil or 400 mil or 4 bil would you be paying 39%? You have that option. I doubt you would. I could be wrong though.

That's a very, very poor argument. I'm not going to explain why, because I suspect you already know.

It's not 'class warfare' or 'jealousy' to debate the tax code. People of all incomes do it all the time. You've been brainwashed.

The idea of having more tax brackets really comes from 'Joe the Plumber'. His thesis was that people making $250K aren't rich, and by some standards he's right. The tax brackets should be indexed, both to avoid 'bracket creep' (people falling into higher brackets without making more money) and to allow enough brackets to distinguish between the super-wealthy and the prosperous.

Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain